KAILUA-KONA — What does the extension of an agricultural theft pilot program on the Big Island have in common with moves to facilitate an expanded market for Hawaii-grown papaya in China?
The answer is almost nothing, except that a late-stage amendment from the Senate Ways and Means Committee to a piece of House legislation has made House Bill 1883 a vehicle for both initiatives. The measure passed its final reading in the Senate on Tuesday and will head next to conference committee where its fate will be decided.
Rep. Richard Creagan, D-Hawaii Island, primary introducer of HB 1883, said the mashing of papayas into his legislation is an example of the “gut and replace” tactics happening with greater frequency this year in the Senate.
“They just take one bill and turn it into another,” Creagan said. “When you have a title like this one, “Relating to Agriculture,” you can put anything in there. It had nothing to do with ag theft.”
The ag theft program is a joint venture between the state Department of Agriculture and the Hawaii County Prosecutor’s Office that created a position to police secondary and tertiary markets for stolen agricultural goods.
County Prosecutor Mitch Roth said the program has proven effective in its first year. Creagan’s legislation extends the program two years and adds a second position on Hawaii Island. Depending on success, the program may expand statewide down the line.
The papaya initiative appropriates funds to study why and where in the growing and transport process the fruit breaks down so as to make it more viable for export, thereby strengthening Hawaii’s agricultural economy, particularly on the Big Island where the vast majority of the state’s papaya is grown.
Hawaii exported nearly $8.1 million in papaya globally in 2016, including more than $2.2 million to Hong Kong, according to export totals provided by the DOA. In 2017, export value dropped to $7 million.
China recently announced its intention to place a 15 percent tariff on U.S.-shipped papaya amid escalating trade tensions between that country’s leadership and President Donald Trump’s administration.
However, Eric Weinert, general manager of Calavo Growers Inc., Hawaii Operations, said the timing of the state initiative coinciding with the new tariff isn’t a significant concern.
“Papaya is generally a luxury fruit regardless,” he said. “So I think the impact will be minimal in terms of sales. As far as potential market, it’s huge for us.”
Audit reason
for bill mashing
Plans for papaya were paired with ag theft because of differing viewpoints over a potential audit of the Agribusiness Development Corporation.
The Legislature established the ADC in 1994 to help Hawaii transition from the plantation economy to a more diverse agricultural profile. It is attached to the state Department of Agriculture, Creagan explained, but has never functioned as a normal state entity.
“They didn’t have to file procurement. They weren’t civil service. They really had no rules and were very unstructured,” he said.
Rep. Cynthia Thielen, an Oahu Republican, said since its inception, the ADC has been required to submit a detailed report of plans and activities before every regular session, something that hasn’t been done since 1997.
“Isn’t this our job at the Legislature to oversee these entities that we create?” she posed.
Playing politics
The initial papaya legislation, Senate Bill 3087, was drafted by Senate Ways and Means Chairman Donovan Dela Cruz, described by Thielen as perhaps the ADC’s most fervent legislative supporter.
ADC Executive Director James Nakatani initially voiced support for Dela Cruz’s bill. In its original form, SB 3087 would have sent money to the ADC to kick start a science and marketing campaign for papaya, and nothing more.
After the measure crossed over, however, the House Committee on Agriculture amended the bill, and with it apparently Nakatani’s support. The ADC director submitted subsequent testimony in opposition of the measure in which he contended “An audit would be too onerous at this time for an agency the size of ADC due to the amount of time and attention it will require.”
Several legislators, however, disagree.
“Rep. Thielen and I are jointly concerned about the rapid expansion of the ADC, both in terms of the scope of their mission and the amount of money involved,” said Creagan, who chairs the House Committee on Agriculture. “We, and many of our colleagues, feel that it’s time for an audit so that there will be transparency and any concerns people have will be addressed.”
Dela Cruz, an Oahu Democrat, took umbrage to the notion that there is no oversight. He stressed that ADC board meetings are open to the public and that a board of nine individuals oversees the ADC, which employs only four people including Nakatani.
“I’m not afraid of transparency,” Dela Cruz said. “That’s why we have a board that provides sunshine.”
Dela Cruz stopped short of expressly addressing whether or not he opposed an audit, saying instead that SB 3087, the measure he originally drafted and to which the audit is tied, remains alive and will be hashed out in conference committee.
Email Max Dible at mdible@westhawaiitoday.com.
